Reposted by Michael Shellenberger
The statement engages in public discourse by addressing the actions of the European Union and its impact on tech firms, specifically in relation to free speech and regulatory compliance. It critiques the EU's regulatory approach and suggests ulterior motives behind their actions, which are significant public issues.
- The statement implies harm by accusing the EU of imposing 'impossible rules' to punish tech firms, which could be seen as inflammatory and potentially harmful rhetoric. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in direct harassment or hate speech, but it does make serious accusations against the EU without providing evidence, which could be seen as disrespectful to the dignity of the institution. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it presents a one-sided view without acknowledging the EU's perspective or the reasons behind the regulations. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, as it makes accusatory claims without engaging with the EU's stated reasons for their actions. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement exercises free speech but does so in a manner that could be seen as lacking responsibility and integrity, as it makes serious accusations without substantiation. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.